Chamber and committees

I have a similar question for Craig Fergusson. Within the community wealth building framework and the pillars that you talked about, do you find it challenging to track the social, environmental and other outcomes of your procurement spend? What other barriers prevent us from getting the social or environmental outcomes that we might wish to get, given the current procurement set-up?

On your last point about targets and about identifying the social or environmental impacts that we want to see, should those come from national or local government, should they be community led, or should there be a mixture?

That cultural buy-in is important.

I think that there might be a role for tech innovation there somewhere, but I am not quite sure what that would involve. I will leave that for now.

I suppose that you are suggesting that having students and staff campaigning for things inside universities sometimes makes a difference to procurement.

Rob Mustard or Joe Rowan, do you have anything to add?

David Livey, do you want to comment?

You talked about supporting conditionality as long as grant funders recognise that they need to provide the resources for that. What is your assessment of the extent to which grant givers and other funders understand full cost recovery? Do they understand the extent of what that means for charities and the different types of organisation that SCVO represents?

There is a gap there for us to close.

What is your assessment of why procurement is being used when grant funding or other mechanisms, such as service level agreements, could be used?